H.R.1137 - No Kill Switches in Cars Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1137, the "No Kill Switches in Cars Act," seeks to repeal Section 24220 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which mandates the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations regarding advanced impaired driving technology. The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 7, 2025, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The primary aim of the bill is to prevent the implementation of technology that could remotely disable or control vehicles, often referred to as "kill switches." Proponents argue that such technology infringes upon personal freedom and privacy.
This bill reflects concerns about governmental overreach and the potential misuse of technology that could compromise individual autonomy in transportation.
Expected Effects
If passed, H.R.1137 would prevent the Department of Transportation from requiring advanced impaired driving technology, including kill switches, in vehicles. This would leave the decision to implement such safety features to individual consumers and vehicle manufacturers.
It could also lead to a debate on the balance between safety regulations and personal liberties, potentially influencing future legislation related to technology in vehicles.
Ultimately, the bill's passage would mean that vehicles would not be mandated to have technology that could remotely disable them due to impaired driving.
Potential Benefits
- Preservation of Individual Liberty: Prevents potential government overreach into personal vehicle control.
- Protection of Privacy: Reduces concerns about data collection and surveillance associated with advanced driving technology.
- Consumer Choice: Allows consumers to decide whether or not to adopt impaired driving technology in their vehicles.
- Reduced Regulatory Burden: Eliminates the need for the Department of Transportation to develop and enforce complex regulations.
- Innovation: Allows market forces to determine the best approach to impaired driving prevention, rather than government mandates.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential Increase in Impaired Driving Incidents: Removing the mandate could lead to more accidents and fatalities caused by impaired drivers.
- Slower Adoption of Safety Technology: Without a government mandate, the adoption of advanced impaired driving technology may be slower and less widespread.
- Public Safety Concerns: The absence of kill switches could make it more difficult to prevent or stop impaired drivers from operating vehicles.
- Liability Issues: Could create legal challenges related to accidents caused by impaired drivers in vehicles without the mandated technology.
- Discourages Technological Advancement: May disincentivize the development and implementation of new safety technologies in vehicles.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the U.S. Constitution is centered around the balance between government regulation and individual liberties. Arguments in favor of the bill might cite the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, suggesting that mandatory kill switches could be seen as an infringement on personal privacy and freedom of movement.
Conversely, the government's power to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8) could be invoked to justify the original mandate for advanced impaired driving technology, arguing that it promotes public safety and reduces the societal costs associated with impaired driving.
Ultimately, the constitutionality of the issue hinges on how the courts weigh these competing interests.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).